Emboldened by Megaupload shutdown, Hollywood targets Hotfile

Film studios are trying to shut down Hotfile, arguing the site's business …

Film studios are asking a US District Court for a summary judgment against Hotfile, saying the file sharing site's business model is identical to that of Megaupload, a site shut down by the US government in January due to repeated copyright infringement.

"Hotfile's business model is indistinguishable from that of the website Megaupload, which recently was indicted criminally for engaging in the very same conduct as Hotfile," plaintiffs Disney, 20th Century Fox, Universal, Columbia, and Warner Bros. argued in a court filing Monday in the Southern District of Florida. "Defendants even admit they formed Hotfile 'to compete with' Megaupload."

The studios argued Hotfile is not eligible for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's Safe Harbor provision, in part because the site did not terminate repeat infringers, or identify and keep track of infringers. The studios accessed Hotfile data through the litigation discovery process, and say the infringement notices sent to Hotfile by copyright owners revealed a "staggering" number of repeat infringers. Hotfile owner Anton Titov "has a direct financial stake in Hotfile's extensive infringing activities, which he took active steps to enable," the court filing states.

Hotfile argues that it is eligible for DMCA safe harbor provisions because it has taken steps including registering a DMCA agent, and informing users about its repeat infringer policy. Throughout the site's three-year history Hotfile says it has provided a "report abuse" form for content owners to send DMCA takedown notices, and has taken down links in response.

In a separate filing, Titov argued that he is not responsible for the day-to-day operations of Hotfile. Titov is responsible for technical matters, but "has not implemented technical features to frustrate copyright owner enforcement efforts," he argued. Hotfile even developed a tool that lets "selected copyright owners instantaneously take down files that they believe infringer their copyrights," Titov's filing states.

The film studios' suit against Hotfile was filed in February 2011. Hotfile countersued in September, charging that Warner Bros. violated the DMCA by repeatedly demanding removal of content the studio did not own.

If you run a file hosting site, at some point in time it will be used to host files of questionable legality.As the owner of said hosting file site, how do you deal with this, and the inevitable lawsuit from some large media corporation claiming DMCA, ATCA, HIPPA, OSHA, EPA, FBI, CIA, NSA, KGB, GRU, SS violation(s)?

Each time those corps take down a file hosting site, they are emboldened to take a crack at another one. Where does it end?DropBox is legit yes? So it'll be immune from this yes?

I really wonder how much of this being undertaken for the benefit to stem the losses to the porn industry rather than Hollywood itself. Seriously, their losses are probably larger by percentage of gross revenue. I suspect that we don't hear that industry mentioned as benefactor of these take downs as who in DC would take up this fight for their benefit?

I really wonder how much of this being undertaken for the benefit to stem the losses to the porn industry rather than Hollywood itself. Seriously, their losses are probably larger by percentage of gross revenue. I suspect that we don't hear that industry mentioned as benefactor of these take downs as who in DC would take up this fight for their benefit?

This particular suit was filed by Disney, 20th Century Fox, Universal, Columbia, and Warner Bros., however.

Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions. Mayor: What do you mean, "biblical"? Dr Ray Stantz: What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor, real wrath of God type stuff. Dr. Peter Venkman: Exactly. Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes... Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave! Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! Mayor: All right, all right! I get the point!

I'm predicting Dropbox will soon disable its public folder feature to avoid any possible risks.

Yousendit will be attacked before Dropbox, but they're both coming. And then they go after the real problem: email attachments.

Uh, why does everyone bring Dropbox up when this topic comes up? I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files? At least, that's the only purpose I've ever used it for and seen it used for.

I'm predicting Dropbox will soon disable its public folder feature to avoid any possible risks.

Yousendit will be attacked before Dropbox, but they're both coming. And then they go after the real problem: email attachments.

Uh, why does everyone bring Dropbox up when this topic comes up? I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files? At least, that's the only purpose I've ever used it for and seen it used for.

Music is easily small enough to distribute via dropbox. It is not inconceivable that you would put up albums to share then post the public ink in a file sharing forum.

I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files?

If you run a file hosting site, at some point in time it will be used to host files of questionable legality.As the owner of said hosting file site, how do you deal with this, and the inevitable lawsuit from some large media corporation claiming DMCA, ATCA, HIPPA, OSHA, EPA, FBI, CIA, NSA, KGB, GRU, SS violation(s)?

Each time those corps take down a file hosting site, they are emboldened to take a crack at another one. Where does it end?DropBox is legit yes? So it'll be immune from this yes?

Are you sure about that?

That's kind of what I've always though.

Any system that can be used to transfer large legal files publicly (dare I say Linux distros) can be abused as well. And most likely will be.

If there is so much money to be made in these file locker services, maybe hollywood studios should start their own. Then they can see how easy it is to keep these files/users off.

I never used MegaUpload or Hotfile but this is getting out of control. This is one of the reasons I never go out to see movies... that and street youths! Soon we won't be able to rely on Google docs and our file lockers there.

I think people should be happy about this lawsuit. If Hotfile really was playing by the rules, if you believe their press statement, they will come out victorious in court. Which is actually ideal, because you'll have megaupload (if they are found guilty) which broke the rules and got shut down vs. hotfile (assuming they are found not guilty, which they will if they aren't lying in their press statement) and it'll be clear as day every time a judge has another case cross his bench. Pretty soon big content stops bringing these cases because it is costly and a waste of everyone's time.

I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files?

50 or a 100 GB could store a fair amount of pirated material.

I only use it for things I create and own the copyright to, though.

How do you know that you own the copyright? I am thinking of the case recently where someone had a Youtube vidoe taken down because of copyright issues related to the recording of birds singing in the background.

Uh, didn't they begin back in January with the Megaupload takedown? I'm expecting them to go after each one in turn because MU went down so easily and they have precedent now.

That precedent is exactly it. Whether they win or lose the MU case is of little consequence because the reality of it is that MU is gone. The threat is enough to scare the competitors as is evident by all the recent changes and closures to the remaining sites.

I think people should be happy about this lawsuit. If Hotfile really was playing by the rules, if you believe their press statement, they will come out victorious in court. Which is actually ideal, because you'll have megaupload (if they are found guilty) which broke the rules and got shut down vs. hotfile (assuming they are found not guilty, which they will if they aren't lying in their press statement) and it'll be clear as day every time a judge has another case cross his bench. Pretty soon big content stops bringing these cases because it is costly and a waste of everyone's time.

Yeah, we should all be happy while companies are raped for their worth and issued obscurity. Indeed, we should be jumping for joy while we see the online landscape crippled with unnecessary safeguards so that the remaining companies are not likewise destroyed. I don't know about you, but I'm fucking GLAD this is happening in my country. Makes me REAL proud.

I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files?

50 or a 100 GB could store a fair amount of pirated material.

I only use it for things I create and own the copyright to, though.

How do you know that you own the copyright? I am thinking of the case recently where someone had a Youtube vidoe taken down because of copyright issues related to the recording of birds singing in the background.

In the case you mention, the video creator was the copyright holder, but ContentID misidentified the file as being copyright by others.

I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files?

50 or a 100 GB could store a fair amount of pirated material.

I only use it for things I create and own the copyright to, though.

How do you know that you own the copyright? I am thinking of the case recently where someone had a Youtube vidoe taken down because of copyright issues related to the recording of birds singing in the background.

I use Dropbox as well, and I know that the stuff that I store on their cloud is copyrighted by either myself or my wife... I know probably the same way MyCat does... it's stuff that we've created ourselves... in my wife's case, it's art that she's created or in my case documents/code that I've written.

I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files?

50 or a 100 GB could store a fair amount of pirated material.

I only use it for things I create and own the copyright to, though.

How do you know that you own the copyright? I am thinking of the case recently where someone had a Youtube vidoe taken down because of copyright issues related to the recording of birds singing in the background.

That was put back up when they realised how retarded they were for filing the complaint. It shows just how blasé they are about the whole copyright thing and assume copyright on things they "might" own, but don't always do. It reminds me of Polydor Records YouTube channel having things blocked or the audio muted due to copyright claims too... it's THEIR material! They own it!

I think people should be happy about this lawsuit. If Hotfile really was playing by the rules, if you believe their press statement, they will come out victorious in court. Which is actually ideal, because you'll have megaupload (if they are found guilty) which broke the rules and got shut down vs. hotfile (assuming they are found not guilty, which they will if they aren't lying in their press statement) and it'll be clear as day every time a judge has another case cross his bench. Pretty soon big content stops bringing these cases because it is costly and a waste of everyone's time.

Yeah, we should all be happy while companies are raped for their worth and issued obscurity. Indeed, we should be jumping for joy while we see the online landscape crippled with unnecessary safeguards so that the remaining companies are not likewise destroyed. I don't know about you, but I'm fucking GLAD this is happening in my country. Makes me REAL proud.

Love the sarcasm, but I'm just trying to point out that it only takes one win and these things start going away. I personally see why they took down mega (if what the gov is saying is true), but I know almost nothing about hotfile and if this case gets thrown out because its garbage that is a huge step in the right direction. Same reason mega right away claimed, "we are just like youtube", other sites can start claiming we are just like hotfile. So it sucks for hotfile but they are the unlucky ones taking it for the team. And if it's true that they are just like mega and mega goes down, then in my opinion they deserve to go down as well.

Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions. Mayor: What do you mean, "biblical"? Dr Ray Stantz: What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor, real wrath of God type stuff. Dr. Peter Venkman: Exactly. Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes... Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave! Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! Mayor: All right, all right! I get the point!

"Big Copyright Holders" wanted mass shutdowns on one day, say, the 13th of the month, maybe a Friday; but their lawyers advised against it.The concept might be Copyrighted.

I've never seen a single Dropbox link for pirated material. The amount of space available is too limiting to be of much use for this purpose, IMO. Isn't Dropbox used almost entirely by people for their private files?

50 or a 100 GB could store a fair amount of pirated material.

I only use it for things I create and own the copyright to, though.

How do you know that you own the copyright? I am thinking of the case recently where someone had a Youtube vidoe taken down because of copyright issues related to the recording of birds singing in the background.

That was put back up when they realised how retarded they were for filing the complaint. It shows just how blasé they are about the whole copyright thing and assume copyright on things they "might" own, but don't always do. It reminds me of Polydor Records YouTube channel having things blocked or the audio muted due to copyright claims too... it's THEIR material! They own it!

Until they do something like this for video:

"SoundExchange (the RIAA) considers any digital performance of a song as falling under their compulsory license. If any artist records a song, SoundExchange has the right to collect royalties for its performance on Internet radio. Artists can offer to download their music for free, but they cannot offer their songs to Internet radio for free. (http://soundexchange.com/faq.html#a7)

So how it works is that SoundExchange collects money through compulsory royalties from Webcasters and holds onto the money. If a label or artist wants their share of the money, they must become a member of SoundExchange and pay a fee to collect their royalties "

What we really need is heavy penalties for false DMCA take down notices.

If a content producer can't be sure that its their IP being illegally used and sends a DMCA take down notice that is incorrect, they should have to pay a serious fine to the government as well as penalties to the ISP and user that received that notice.

Hasn't hotfile fallen out of favor of pirates anyways? Their quick turnaround time on dmca takedowns and full out account bans for repeat offenders (which takes all of their files offline), and other similar moves makes it usually one of the quickest ways to get your file taken off the net these days if you're trying to post something you don't own. I don't think this is comparable to megaupload at all.

What we really need is heavy penalties for false DMCA take down notices.

If a content producer can't be sure that its their IP being illegally used and sends a DMCA take down notice that is incorrect, they should have to pay a serious fine to the government as well as penalties to the ISP and user that received that notice.

Love the sarcasm, but I'm just trying to point out that it only takes one win and these things start going away. I personally see why they took down mega (if what the gov is saying is true), but I know almost nothing about hotfile and if this case gets thrown out because its garbage that is a huge step in the right direction. Same reason mega right away claimed, "we are just like youtube", other sites can start claiming we are just like hotfile. So it sucks for hotfile but they are the unlucky ones taking it for the team. And if it's true that they are just like mega and mega goes down, then in my opinion they deserve to go down as well.

Except it's not quite like that. First of all, we'll probably have a dozen lawsuits before we find out the results of the MU case. Furthermore, there will probably be cases in different districts, and even if hotfile wins, Hollywood will file a suit in another district, and keep doing so until they find one as friendly as the Eastern Texas district is to patent trolls.

Even if Hollywood does start losing, they'll use that as evidence that they need a stronger law. Pretty much the only way this is a win is if Chris Dodd and other high level executives have bombs strapped to their chest that will explode if they lose this case.

This particular suit was filed by Disney, 20th Century Fox, Universal, Columbia, and Warner Bros., however.

Perhaps if they charged less for their content in the first place, or came up with a decent alternative business model for the current generations they would look a little better on this one.

Hell, can't recall when I last went to a cinema, far too expensive compared to buying a DVD or Blu-Ray. Equally I don't buy those anymore, I simply rent it out from the comfort of my own home.

When they catch up with the real world, perhaps they'll come out smelling of roses. While I disagree with copyright infringement, the way they are approaching this with a massive hammer is going to hit more than just a nail.

[...]I'm just trying to point out that it only takes one win and these things start going away.

Yeah, because it's not like while the litigation continues, these companies won't possibly go out of business. Meanwhile, the chilling effect fucks over everyone because all competition begins locking down their service so that links can't be shared to others.